[punkytina]

For against ? (us citizens) do you think we should bring it back? (uk citizens).. I'm an anti death penalty activist, no i dont do stupid things like stand in front of prisons and refuse to let the vans through that are taking prisoners to jail, and we dont have the death penalty in the uk anymore (thankfully) But do you think the cons outway the pros.. I mean if we kill killers do we rape rapist?
There are many ways to deal with prisoners who have done terrible things, Neutering sex offenders for a start! Taking someones life for a crime is not the answer. Of course im all for voluntary death penalty, if some prisoner chose the death penalty then yes thats fine.. other than that what about death penalty for the mentally ill? Or death penalty for children? If you agree with the death penalty then surely you would agree to it being applied to everyone no matter what?(Mentally ill., children, pensioners)
This isnt an arguement just wondered how people stood on the subject, if this isnt the forum for this topic i do apologise as i couldnt find a forum that this would have been more apt in

[Samual]

Don't we still have the dealth penalty for high treason?

I don't agree with the death penalty at all, even with forensics so many people are still being found innocent even though a DNA sample tests correct (which if you understand the science of, it is only right 75-80% of the time). I don't think having a dealth pentalty achieves anything, a prisoner can be in prison a few years and then be murdered, or he/she can live out their full sentance, to me a dealth penalty seems the easy way out. I mean look at Sadam Hussien, he would of crapped himself if he had to go to a high security prison. I don't think a prisoner should be able to choose the death penalty, why give them what they want? If someone were to murder a member of my family and I killed them, I would still go to prison, so why should someone be employed and paid to kill people?

As well if you look at countries that have the death penalty for certain crimes, they tend to have a higher crime rate than those countries without a death penalty, so that shows that it does not work.

As it goes, An eye for an eye and the world goes blind.

[mcmama]

For, but only some of the time.

I don't think the death penalty is a deterrent to crime. The mentality of the criminal who gets the death penalty is often that they weren't going to get caught anyway. And I don't think the eye for an eye thing is a good precedent. For example, the whole Tookie Williams thing was wrong - executing him accomplished nothing, and he may have accomplished more by living. It would have been well worth the effort to keep him alive, and in prison for the rest of his life. His crimes were terrible, but he actually lived a life in prison that affected people in a positive way outside of prison. So people like that, and most people actually, no.

But there are some people for whom the public is better off if they are executed, rather than if they are allowed to remain alive in prison, at public expense, leading marginal lives, and encouraging followers or fringe lunatics to make them into some kind of hero. We'd all be better off if Manson had been executed, for example. It serves no good keeping him alive, and he was at one point a serious security risk.

Ted Bundy is another example. He killed lots of people in Florida AFTER he escaped from prison in Colorado, awaiting trial. The last victim was a child. To keep him alive would have endangered others. That is clear. HIs pattern was clearly escape and do it again. And he was very manipulative.

As for Saddam, again, better off dead. Someone like that in prison, you wonder what they are up to. Too much risk.

Then there's just simply annoying stuff, like how Richard Speck lived a life in prison becoming more and more degenerate, getting medical care at public expense, while 7 young women who were studying to be nurses never got the chance to live - or GIVE medical care. Frankly, I thinl he should have been executed too. Same with Dahmer, instead of just letting it happen. Serial killers and mass murderers should be executed.

[Magic_Mikki]

When I first saw this topic, I had to exit the internet and close the lap top! It's hard to debate this issue because no one is going to change their minds, ya know? But I had to chip in! hehe!

I'm against the death penalty. I didn't used to be, and perhaps if someone were to murder my dear Alex I might think differently. But here, now, in this point in my life I am definately against it. There are many reasons why, but here are just a couple.

First of all, the Constitution says there is to be no cruel and unusual punishment. I believe that killing a person (no matter how low-key it is) is cruel punishment. Who decided that he's God and gets to determine who lives and who dies? Not to mention, the State gets to decide if it uses the death penalty or not, and because of this some states have it, and some don't. This inconsistacy is not right.

Second, the death penalty costs significantly more than life in prison. I know a few people will argue against this, but those people just haven't done the math, or easier yet, haven't just looked up the statistics! Between appeals, court-ordered lawyers, and the actual act, it costs- BY FAR- more to kill the prisoner than to house him for the rest of his life, even if the guy is 19 years old and lives to be 80. It's true. It's in the facts.

Third, there have been way too many cases where the person who was executed was proved to be innocent after the fact. This is sickening. I'm not talking about just a couple of cases, but a huge amount. I will look it up and ask my Corrections/Prison professor and get back with a few statistics on this.

[Magic_Mikki]

I found some facts. These are for California, so the numbers are just general.

It costs more than $90,000 MORE per year to just HOUSE a death row inmate than the general prison population.

By the end, it costs more than $250 million dollars to execute someone.

4 billion tax-payer dollars MORE are spent each year on death row cases than on other cases.

Since 1973, 129 death row inmates have been exonerated in all the of US. In California there have been 6 cases where the inmate was found to be not guilty after the inmate was already put to death. That is 6 people in 35 years... That's an average of one every five years. That's just in California. That's way too much.

You can read all about these facts (and a ton more) at this link:
http://www.deathpenalty.org/article....t=type&type=24

[lavatea]

Originally Posted by Magic_Mikki

Not to mention, the State gets to decide if it uses the death penalty or not, and because of this some states have it, and some don't. This inconsistacy is not right.

This is how our country was set up - not just for the death penalty. The country was envisioned as a loose federation of states. Each state would govern as they saw fit. Sadly, more and more control has been usurped by the federal government, and the average citizen has sat back and let it happen.

As for the death penalty, I'm on the fence. I really liked mcmama's answer. I used to be completely for the death penalty, however, as I read about and debate the abortion issue, I'm coming to see that the death penalty is also a life issue. However, with the death penalty we are talking about criminals, not innocents, so for one to say that they are completely analogous would be false. I do recognize that there are flaws in the system, and the death penalty is not justly applied. But I'm not at the point where I can say I'm definitely against it.

[twinzplus3]

Originally Posted by lavatea

However, with the death penalty we are talking about criminals, not innocents, so for one to say that they are completely analogous would be false.

This really depends on your stance on Scripture actually. (I won't get into that here. . .but maybe we'll start another thread on it sometime in the Christian section.)I am one who lumps capital punishment in with abortion and other sanctity of life issues. I think that anytime you (meaning society in general) doesn't err on the side of preserving life, it's a slippery slope. There's a general logic that's used to justify death and it begins to permeate all matters in society. I also just think it's too expensive to execute a criminal. It just doesn't make sense from an economic stand point at all.

[mcmama]

Miki, thanks for the figures. Yes it is certainly true that keeping someone on death row is very expensive, with all the appeals, and the security and such. My guess is that your probably get guard burnout over the years in that environment.

For me, the question is this: Is society truly better off if we execute this person? In most cases, no matter what the crime, the answer is no. In the cases I mentioned, I think the answer is yes. And it is certainly yes for treason, terrorism, and genocide.

[twinzplus3]

But my issue with that is that the system is imperfect and too many are falsely accused of crimes. I don't see a way to make exceptions when you "know" someone is guilty because in theory you "knew" for everyone else too. And I think that the way to deal with terrorists and treason is not to kill, not only because I think it presents a moral dilemma. But because it also plays into the whole martyrdom theme.

[Samual]

Originally Posted by mcmama

Miki, thanks for the figures. Yes it is certainly true that keeping someone on death row is very expensive, with all the appeals, and the security and such. My guess is that your probably get guard burnout over the years in that environment.

For me, the question is this: Is society truly better off if we execute this person? In most cases, no matter what the crime, the answer is no. In the cases I mentioned, I think the answer is yes. And it is certainly yes for treason, terrorism, and genocide.

Lets see, fairly recently 2007 a British man was released from death row (Ohio) after 20 years, why? He was innocent, he is not the first and he certainly wont be the last, but he is one of the lucky few to leave prison alive. At one point he was being marched to the electric chair when he was granted another trial.

In 2002 another British man was released from death row(Florida) after 17 years when a file on the case was found where a man had repeatedly admitted to the crime, there was no phyiscal evidence for this man either, an officer had wrongly recorded down a transcript which meant the name of the accused was incorrect.

There have been cases where a prisoners have been on death row for a very long time with zero evidence apart from being suspected, then outstanding evidence has been revealed, one where the teeth marks of the attacker was finally used as evidence, the teeth marks did not match the man in prison, but the courts chose to ignore this. The District Judge knew the coroner, guess who told the coroner never to mention the bite marks.

Lets see Sadam Hussien, was willing to give out important information when he was captured, but oh no, we better hang him before we find out where everyone else is hiding.

People are all against killing an innocent baby, but those same people fight to ensure innocent men and women are killed now and for years to come.

I better make sure I never put a postage stamp on upside down, it seems alot of people would love to see me at the gallows for such a show of treason.

When someone is captured in Iraq or Afghanistan and killed people cry out about foul murder, while in some places they cry out in joy when it happens on their turf.

Does no one else see the irony of saying that terrorists should be executed when my country, America and Australia are paying thousands of men and women to be terrorists.

How is society better off with that?